Dave Pretorius v Kenneth Bedwell

The respondent, Kenneth Bedwell, owned a holiday home in Oyster Bay and required funding to complete a guest house project. In 2007 he entered into a written agreement (later rectified) with his brother-in-law, the appellant Dave Pretorius, in terms of which Pretorius would purchase the property for R1 850 000, funded largely by a mortgage bond, with the understanding that the property would be transferred back to Bedwell once Bedwell qualified for his own bond. Bedwell remained in occupation and was responsible for maintenance and rates. After the relationship deteriorated, Pretorius instructed Bedwell to leave the property in April 2008 and later denied him access. In 2009 Pretorius sold the property to a third party without transferring it back to Bedwell. Bedwell became aware of the sale only in July 2010 and instituted an action for damages in October 2011 based on Pretorius’ alleged repudiation of the contract. Pretorius raised a special plea that the claim had prescribed.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, and the dismissal of the special plea of prescription was confirmed.

The case authoritatively confirms that, in South African law, prescription in claims for damages based on repudiation of contract begins to run only once the innocent party has accepted the repudiation and communicated that election. It underscores the importance of proper pleading in special pleas of prescription and clarifies the relationship between repudiation, cancellation, and the accrual of a damages claim.